Key Differences
In short — Core i7-9700F outperforms the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i7-9700F is 621 days newer than the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-9700F
- Performs up to 5% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 190 vs 181 FPS
- Up to 37% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - £258.66 vs £409.61
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 65 vs 180 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-9700F - 24 vs 8 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for £258.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
181
95.26315789473684%
Value, £/FPS
Price, £
£409.61
63%
Buy for £409.61 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Single-Core
1174
75.79083279535183%
Multi-Core
6976
100%
Intel Core i7-9700F | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Core i7 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 180 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
30.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |